<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16809" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Not mysterious at all. Just using a different
away mail box and was unaware of the problem till after work and I
checked my home computer. I don't have any idea why the name in the
from column shows as "a " but the author is the same old g, famed in story and
song, beloved by well behaved Republican children and most conservative small
animals everywhere.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>g</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>----- Original Message ----- </FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>From: "Garrett Clevenger" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:garrettmc@verizon.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>garrettmc@verizon.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>To: <</FONT><A
href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>jampot@roadrunner.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>;
<</FONT><A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>; "Tom
Hansen" <</FONT><A href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>thansen@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>; "a"
<</FONT><A href="mailto:smith@turbonet.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>smith@turbonet.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 5:55
PM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Humane interrogations
work</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><BR><FONT size=2></FONT></FONT></DIV><FONT face=Arial
size=2>> Mysterious Mr. a writes:<BR>> <BR>> "I was quoting directly
from Mr. Clevengers previous pacifist post."<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Actually,
you were not quoting directly from any of my posts. I don't think I wrote "WW II
was violent US policy to force others to conform in our image"<BR>> <BR>>
If I did, I retract it. If I'm being misinterpreted, let me clarify. WW2 was
well under way, as far as I know, before the US entered the fray in direct
combat. Yes, when we did, it was violent policy that drove our military, and
yes, we expected to defeat fascism, which in essence meant we expected others to
conform to what we hold to be the way.<BR>> <BR>> I think the above quote
I am said to have written could mean that the US started WW2, which I believe to
be untrue.<BR>> <BR>> But, speaking of WW2, the irony is, that's when a
lot of seeds of discontent we now discuss were sown.<BR>> <BR>> To fuel
our military during WW2, we made deals with the Saudi Arabian dynasty to gain
access to oil, and we never left after seeing how sweet that oil was. As a
result, we supported a dictatorship, one that now funds radical wahabism and
their madrasas. So essentially, every time you fill up your gas tank, you are
giving money to the very mindset that the war of terror is intending to break.
Since our society is dependent on this foreign oil, unless you are consciously
trying to reduce your consumption, you are guilty of creating even more
jihadists.<BR>> <BR>> After the WW2 ended, Israel was created, which is
ironic considering it is essentially a religious-based country, which I believe
is counter to US values. The Jews were given that terratory, displacing people
who had already been living there.<BR>> <BR>> Since the US is one of
Israel biggest supports, the US is complicit in what has no become a rallying
cry for militant Islamists.<BR>> <BR>> It is fascinating to think that the
assassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand, which led to WW1, which led to WW2, which
led to Israel and our dependence on Middle East oil, may have then led to
911.<BR>> <BR>> gclev<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> --- On Tue, 2/24/09, a
<</FONT><A href="mailto:smith@turbonet.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>smith@turbonet.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>> wrote:<BR>>
<BR>>> From: a <</FONT><A href="mailto:smith@turbonet.com"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>smith@turbonet.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Humane interrogations
work<BR>>> To: </FONT><A href="mailto:garrettmc@verizon.net"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>garrettmc@verizon.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>,
</FONT><A href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>jampot@roadrunner.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>, </FONT><A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>, "Tom Hansen"
<</FONT><A href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>thansen@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>><BR>>>
Date: Tuesday, February 24, 2009, 5:33 PM<BR>>> As far as just being
informed that "WW II was violent<BR>>> US policy to force <BR>>>
> others to conform in our image", is concerned, g<BR>>> . .
.<BR>>> > <BR>>> > The only person that "informed" us here
at<BR>>> the Viz of such garbage, g, was <BR>>> >
you.<BR>>> > <BR>>> > You really ought to read more,
g.<BR>>> <BR>>> My goodness, hamster its like you make being foolish
and<BR>>> belligerent your full time job. You really ought to
read<BR>>> more-carefully. I was quoting directly from Mr.
Clevengers<BR>>> previous pacifist post. <BR>>> <BR>>> As to
point one, you're not exactly on target there<BR>>> either. The unlawful
combatants at Gitmo were granted the<BR>>> minimal protections of common
article three status of the<BR>>> Geneva convention by the US supreme
court on 29 June 2006<BR>>> This stipulates that " The passing of
sentences must<BR>>> also be pronounced by a regularly constituted
court,<BR>>> affording all the judicial guarantees which are
recognized<BR>>> as indispensable by civilized peoples." Decidedly
no<BR>>> mention of being afford the same rights as a "civil<BR>>>
prisioner" (what ever that is) under the US<BR>>> constitution and most
definatly no mention of being brought<BR>>> to America to be tried in a US
civilian court. Military<BR>>> tribunal held at Guantanamo meets the
requirement more than<BR>>> adaquately.<BR>>> <BR>>>
g<BR>>> <BR>>> <BR>>> ----- Original Message -----
<BR>>> From: "Tom Hansen" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>thansen@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>><BR>>> To:
<</FONT><A href="mailto:smith@turbonet.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>smith@turbonet.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>;<BR>>>
<</FONT><A href="mailto:garrettmc@verizon.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>garrettmc@verizon.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>;<BR>>>
<</FONT><A href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>jampot@roadrunner.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>;
<</FONT><A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>><BR>>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 10:06 AM<BR>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020]
Humane interrogations work<BR>>> <BR>>> <BR>>> > Let me
respond to your soments point by point, g.<BR>>> > <BR>>> >
[Point 1. We put prisoners of war in prisoner of war<BR>>> camps because
there <BR>>> > WERE prisioners of war. The detainees at Gitmo are
not<BR>>> POW's and are not <BR>>> > subject to the Geneva
convention.]<BR>>> > <BR>>> > Since the detainees at GITMO are
NOT prisoners of war,<BR>>> they are subjects <BR>>> > to the
governing authority to which they are<BR>>> imprisoned and are afforded
<BR>>> > the same rights (the US Constitution) as a civil<BR>>>
prisoner of that <BR>>> > authority. These rights (again, the US
Constitution)<BR>>> require that <BR>>> > prisoners be charged
with a crime and tried on those<BR>>> charges.<BR>>> >
<BR>>> > Yasee, g. It's either one (prisoners of war)
or<BR>>> the other (civil <BR>>> > prisoners brought up on
charges). <BR>>> > <BR>>> > [Point 2. What does winning
the war have to do with<BR>>> anything? It sounds to <BR>>> > me
as though you are using the might makes right<BR>>> argument.]<BR>>>
> <BR>>> > My reflection of "winning the war" was a<BR>>>
simple reminder that a goal <BR>>> > ("winning a war" in each case) can
be<BR>>> reached while conducting "business" <BR>>> > in
accordance with established standards (the Geneva<BR>>> Convention accords
<BR>>> > for POWs, and the US Constitution for civil<BR>>>
prisoners).<BR>>> > <BR>>> > [Point 3. What moral high ground?
We have just been<BR>>> informed that WW II <BR>>> > was violent
US policy to force others to conform in<BR>>> our image.]<BR>>> >
<BR>>> > Our perceived moral highground, subsequent to WW2,
is<BR>>> seeded within the <BR>>> > Marshall Plan for rebuilding
western Europe subsequent<BR>>> to WW2, along with <BR>>> > the
creation of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty<BR>>> Organization),
<BR>>> > <BR>>> > In case you missed these topics in school .
. .<BR>>> > <BR>>> > The Marshall Plan<BR>>> >
</FONT><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan</FONT></A><BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>>> > <BR>>> > NATO (North Atlantic Treaty
Organization)<BR>>> > </FONT><A
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO</FONT></A><BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>>> > <BR>>> > <BR>>> > As far as just being
informed that "WW II was<BR>>> violent US policy to force <BR>>>
> others to conform in our image", is concerned, g<BR>>> . .
.<BR>>> > <BR>>> > The only person that "informed" us here
at<BR>>> the Viz of such garbage, g, was <BR>>> >
you.<BR>>> > <BR>>> > You really ought to read more,
g.<BR>>> > <BR>>> > Tom Hansen<BR>>> > Moscow,
Idaho<BR>>> > <BR>>> > <BR>>> > <BR>>> >
---------------------------------------------<BR>>> > This message was
sent by First Step Internet.<BR>>>
> </FONT><A
href="http://www.fsr.com/"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>http://www.fsr.com/</FONT></A><BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>>> >
<BR>>> > <BR>>> > <BR>>> > -- <BR>>> > No
virus found in this incoming message.<BR>>> > Checked by AVG.
<BR>>> > Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.3/1969 -<BR>>>
Release Date: 2/24/2009 6:43 AM<BR>>> > <BR>>>
><BR>></FONT></BODY></HTML>